search_medrxiv

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, and the description only mentions searching without disclosing any behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, authentication, return structure). The description fails to compensate for the lack of annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is concise but could be slightly more informative without adding bulk.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of many sibling search tools, the description lacks differentiation and does not explain the scope or limitations of medRxiv. No output schema means return values are unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool searches medRxiv for medical preprints and clinical research, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like search_pubmed and search_arxiv.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_pubmed or search_semantic_scholar. No when-not-to-use or contextual hints.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.